Science Fictions: Exposing Fraud, Bias, Negligence and Hype in Science
- Downloads：4603
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-09-17 08:51:52
- Update Date：2025-09-07
- Status：finish
- Author：Stuart Ritchie
- ISBN：1529110645
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
So much relies on science。 But what if science itself can’t be relied on？
Medicine， education， psychology， health， parenting – wherever it really matters， we look to science for advice。 Science Fictions reveals the disturbing flaws that undermine our understanding of all of these fields and more。
While the scientific method will always be our best and only way of knowing about the world， in reality the current system of funding and publishing science not only fails to safeguard against scientists’ inescapable biases and foibles， it actively encourages them。 From widely accepted theories about ‘priming’ and ‘growth mindset’ to claims about genetics， sleep， microbiotics， as well as a host of drugs， allergies and therapies， we can trace the effects of unreliable， overhyped and even fraudulent papers in austerity economics， the anti-vaccination movement and dozens of bestselling books – and occasionally count the cost in human lives。
Stuart Ritchie was among the first people to help expose these problems。 In this vital investigation， he gathers together the evidence of their full and shocking extent – and how a new reform movement within science is fighting back。 Often witty yet deadly serious， Science Fictions is at the vanguard of the insurgency， proposing a host of remedies to save and protect this most valuable of human endeavours from itself。
Medicine， education， psychology， health， parenting – wherever it really matters， we look to science for advice。 Science Fictions reveals the disturbing flaws that undermine our understanding of all of these fields and more。
While the scientific method will always be our best and only way of knowing about the world， in reality the current system of funding and publishing science not only fails to safeguard against scientists’ inescapable biases and foibles， it actively encourages them。 From widely accepted theories about ‘priming’ and ‘growth mindset’ to claims about genetics， sleep， microbiotics， as well as a host of drugs， allergies and therapies， we can trace the effects of unreliable， overhyped and even fraudulent papers in austerity economics， the anti-vaccination movement and dozens of bestselling books – and occasionally count the cost in human lives。
Stuart Ritchie was among the first people to help expose these problems。 In this vital investigation， he gathers together the evidence of their full and shocking extent – and how a new reform movement within science is fighting back。 Often witty yet deadly serious， Science Fictions is at the vanguard of the insurgency， proposing a host of remedies to save and protect this most valuable of human endeavours from itself。
Reviews
Martin Smedjeback
，
Science is the most important tool we have to reach the truth。 This book is a reminder though not to trust science blindly。 We will probably not find a better way to explore the world but science can surely be improved a lot which this book shows clearly in an interesting way for the non-academic as well as for the academic。
Emil O。 W。 Kirkegaard
，
Great book。 Similar to Chris Chambers 7 deadly sins book but wider in scope。
Josh Frickberg
，
A must read！
Philip
，
Something like this book should be required reading for any and all fields of study。 Period。 （For that reason I'm bumping this 3/3。5-star book up to a juicy 4 stars。） Sure， if you're already familiar with the issues in the book， maybe it doesn't really add much to the debate。 However， it is essential to understand how the publish-or-perish system of academia works， and to be aware of its limitations and pitfalls， and I think Ritchie provides a great tool for that in "Science Fictions。" Additiona Something like this book should be required reading for any and all fields of study。 Period。 （For that reason I'm bumping this 3/3。5-star book up to a juicy 4 stars。） Sure， if you're already familiar with the issues in the book， maybe it doesn't really add much to the debate。 However， it is essential to understand how the publish-or-perish system of academia works， and to be aware of its limitations and pitfalls， and I think Ritchie provides a great tool for that in "Science Fictions。" Additionally， the book is well written， clear， and easily digested。 For as heavy of a subject matter as it covers， it doesn't feel like it。 There are definitely a few times that Ritchie overreaches。 But， considering the message of his book， he'd likely encourage you to fact check him anyway。。。 so I'll let those slide here。So， in summary， this book is well worth a read for pretty much anyone。 Have at it！ 。。。more
Hsandlin
，
Great disambiguation of the practical way science is done in academia。 “Science” has become a bit of a big work in recent years that isn’t always specific。 This books dives into the mechanics of research and publication in a very non-ambiguous way that demystifies the field。 That said， it’s not about that specifically， it’s just a nice side effect。 The book is about how researchers can publish misleading， bad， or out right fraudulent papers that can skew the public’s and even other scientists’ u Great disambiguation of the practical way science is done in academia。 “Science” has become a bit of a big work in recent years that isn’t always specific。 This books dives into the mechanics of research and publication in a very non-ambiguous way that demystifies the field。 That said， it’s not about that specifically， it’s just a nice side effect。 The book is about how researchers can publish misleading， bad， or out right fraudulent papers that can skew the public’s and even other scientists’ understanding of something。 Despite how hot of a topic this could be， the author doesn’t treat it as such。 Instead he is very direct and to the point about what is going on and how to change it。 As he says in the introduction， there are some areas of interest that are outright pseudosciences such as astrology or creationism。 He has little interest in these areas in the context of this book。 It is concerned first and foremost with the implementation of science; research。 He discusses popular studies and books that mislead the public （some of which you have surely read）， how research and be misleading， and how to prevent it in the future。 The writing itself is also well executed， it is easy to read and free of any dense language that could have easily slipped into a book like this。 I highly recommend it for anyone who want to understand science and the state of science in a fuller way。 。。。more
Duane Nickell
，
This is an absolutely terrific book！ I was afraid it might be a bit too technical or philosophical， but that was not the case。 Extremely well-written， logically organized， and， except for a few necessary pages on statistics， very easy to read。 I learned a lot about how science really works。 I'm a big supporter of science， but it does have its problems。 Ritchie makes things interesting by telling stories about specific cases of scientific fraud， negligence， hype， and bias。 At the end of the book， This is an absolutely terrific book！ I was afraid it might be a bit too technical or philosophical， but that was not the case。 Extremely well-written， logically organized， and， except for a few necessary pages on statistics， very easy to read。 I learned a lot about how science really works。 I'm a big supporter of science， but it does have its problems。 Ritchie makes things interesting by telling stories about specific cases of scientific fraud， negligence， hype， and bias。 At the end of the book， he offers solutions to these systemic problems。 This book is NOT an attack on science。 Rather， it reveals the problems that plague the scientific enterprise; problems that must be addressed。 I highly recommend this book to anyone with an interest in science。 。。。more
Yev
，
Please note that this is an informal review and as such citations will not be provided for statements。Although this book is about the many problems in science， it is entirely pro-science and strives to improve it through constructive criticism and the reduction of harmful behaviors by individuals and institutions。 One of the primary criticisms I've seen of it is that it romanticizes the idea of the science and has too high of expectations for how people ought to behave。 I understand this， but I Please note that this is an informal review and as such citations will not be provided for statements。Although this book is about the many problems in science， it is entirely pro-science and strives to improve it through constructive criticism and the reduction of harmful behaviors by individuals and institutions。 One of the primary criticisms I've seen of it is that it romanticizes the idea of the science and has too high of expectations for how people ought to behave。 I understand this， but I don't agree with it。 I don't believe it romanticizes science， though it does propose much higher standards than currently exist， and certainly much higher than are followed in practice。 There are many unfortunate and relatable reasons why， several of which are described within。 Human limitations are the greatest obstacle to scientific progress， but unfortunately even accepting that doesn't seem to affect behavior much。 These limitations are present at every structural level。 None of this is new， history is littered with the bodies， figuratively and literally， of those who challenged their prevailing status quo。 Their challenges weren't always warranted， but there have been many times when they were。Example not in the book:https://en。wikipedia。org/wiki/Ignaz_S。。。A doctor told doctors that they should disinfect their hands because the scientific literature said it greatly reduced mortality rates。 The doctors mocked and ridiculed him and eventually he's committed to an insane asylum in 1865， where he was beaten by the guards， and then died from a gangrenous wound。 The Semmelweis Reflex， "a metaphor for the reflex-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms， beliefs， or paradigms。" is named after him。https://en。wikipedia。org/wiki/Semmelw。。。The bulk of the book is concerned with psychology， because the author is a psychologist， though many other fields have examples given as well。 These problems are not limited to anything specific， they are all-encompassing。 The differences are in terms of frequency and severity。 There are failures of self-discipline and ethical behavior from individuals and an immense failure of self-regulation by institutions。 Not all the blame can be put on them as they are subjected to various perverse incentives and systemic societal pressures as well。Many example stories are presented of the failures of individuals and institutions。 There's overall more a focus on the specific than the general， which probably ought to be expected since psychology is more the study of the individual。Part I is about how science works and the replication crisis， which is the failure of someone else being able to independently confirm the results of a study。 This differs from the reproduction problem， where others cannot even attempt to test their results。Part II details the faults and flaws， specifically fraud， bias， negligence and hype。 Specific stories for each are presented。A somewhat related story of negligence that comes to mind to me is of this serial killer: https://en。wikipedia。org/wiki/Michael。。。Unfortunately， as noted in this book more than a few times， too much good faith is assumed and too much trust is given。 This is a terrible situation， as a lack of trust is extremely corrosive to credibility and expectations， and thus to the smooth functioning of society。 Therefore， those who abuse trust and goodwill are one of the greatest dangers to the continuance of civilization。 Not the least of which is that allows for the proliferation of conspiracy theories and pseudoscience。Part III puts forth what author believes to be the causes for these systemic issues and proposes various ways to mitigate them， as resolving them would require a very substantial shift in both individual behavior and global culture。Here's a related blog post:https://fantasticanachronism。com/2020。。。 。。。more
Gregory Myles
，
I thoroughly enjoyed this account of the miraculous achievements and profound limitations of modern science and think it should be essential reading for the budding and established researcher。 None of the arguments are particularly revolutionary or surprising （indeed， anyone who works in a scientific discipline is probably aware of the majority of these problems and can name several personal examples） but they are arrayed in a logical and compelling manner with a refreshing dose of optimism and I thoroughly enjoyed this account of the miraculous achievements and profound limitations of modern science and think it should be essential reading for the budding and established researcher。 None of the arguments are particularly revolutionary or surprising （indeed， anyone who works in a scientific discipline is probably aware of the majority of these problems and can name several personal examples） but they are arrayed in a logical and compelling manner with a refreshing dose of optimism and call for reform。 Dr Ritchie doesn't opt to simply provide a weary list of the shortcomings of the scientific process but instead peppers the book with valuable insights and suggestions for how we can overhaul and improve this process at the individual and institutional levels。 I expected that I might come away with a bleaker or more sardonic outlook on research and academia as a whole after reading this， but I am pleasantly surprised by how motivated and enthused and reinvigorated this book has left me feeling about my own work and future career。I would also strongly recommend this book to any non-scientist with a passing interest as there are valuable lessons in how to interpret the oft-hyped media portrayals of scientific discoveries and how to engage in healthy levels of scepticism without losing faith altogether and mistrusting everything that is published。 Several of the most prominent and far-reaching examples of fraud， bias， negligence， and hype in the literature are discussed， such as Andrew Wakefield's scientific misconduct and fraudulent attempts at proving a link between the MMR vaccine and autism; the fallout of which continues to cause harm around the world today。 However， many of the other smaller and subtler examples came as a surprise to me， particularly from Dr Ritchie's own field of Psychology - I found that many of the snippets of information I had heard or read about in passing have now been completely discredited or redacted and I had had no idea。 In summary， Science Fictions provides a coherent， compelling， and enlightening account of the flaws and foibles of the scientific process and the oftentimes radical consequences on politics， health， economics， and other aspects of our society。 However， critically， it also provides the basis， rationale， and incentive to pursue much-needed scientific reform and its precepts will be worthwhile and fruitful to both scientist and layman alike。 。。。more
Igor Veloso
，
É uma excelente introdução à meta-ciência。É um campo que adoro porque serve para desmistificar o que se passa na academia， e mostra o grande elemento humano dentro da ciência。 Quantos estudos apareceram na televisão， ou com quantas crenças vivemos no dia a dia， desde a nutrição à psicologia， que na verdade são uma verdadeira peta， desmascaradas por fraude ao tempo， ou resultados foram manipulados de forma a que o estudo ganha-se impacto， ainda que muito pouco ou nada tenha de rigoroso。 Quantos i É uma excelente introdução à meta-ciência。É um campo que adoro porque serve para desmistificar o que se passa na academia， e mostra o grande elemento humano dentro da ciência。 Quantos estudos apareceram na televisão， ou com quantas crenças vivemos no dia a dia， desde a nutrição à psicologia， que na verdade são uma verdadeira peta， desmascaradas por fraude ao tempo， ou resultados foram manipulados de forma a que o estudo ganha-se impacto， ainda que muito pouco ou nada tenha de rigoroso。 Quantos inocentes ou gente nova， acabados de tirar curso na universidade， que ainda não reconhecem que uma meta-análise é altamente susceptível a lixo dentro， lixo fora， não corroborando os resultados， ou não procurando pelo enviesamento。O mundo real， e o método científico， embora cheio de nuance， é virtualmente infalível。 Já o processo de convencer o mundo que o que se descobriu é verdade， está carregado de bias， fraude， hype e muitas vezes inocente negligência com grandes consequências quer para os próprios investigadores， quer para a reputação do mundo científico。 A pandemia veio a salientar a clivagem ainda mais， colocando à mostra a crise de replicação e forma como se faz ciência。Porém o livro em nenhum momento diz mal do método científico ou pede um "reset" da ciência。 A pandemia também foi um excelente exemplo dos seus avanços。 Stuart Ritchie identifica os incentivos perversos que levam investigadores a agirem de má fé， ou a apressar o projecto， ou a cair nas tentações deixadas pelos seus financiadores。 Por fim deixa algumas dicas sobre o que fazer para concertar isto， ainda que reconheça a monstruosa dificuldade。 Apesar de todo o livro lavar os olhos dos encantados pela ciência， termina com uma mensagem de esperança。Partilhei este livro com outros alunos universitários， amigos interessados， e investigadores desde a neuro-ciência à sociologia， e adoraram e recomendam。 Terá algumas verdades inconvenientes， desencantará alguns， e outros discordarão de um ponto ou outro， mas para quem ainda acredita que a academia permanece o principal pilar do método científico， poderá servir de auxiliar e lembrança que a manipulação feita hoje， propositada ou não， eventualmente será apanhada e custará não só a carreira do próprio， como a vida dos todos os seres humanos que dependem da ciência。 PS: Só precisava de mais esquemas e gráficos。 No entanto preparem-se para cerca de 100 páginas de referências， com respectivos links e DOI。 。。。more
Bruce
，
Anyone working in a STEM field should read this book。 Even if you’re into “pop-science” news this worth reading。 There is so much nonsense and straight up fraud out there， but it’s not a sign of the end of science。 Ritchie shows how being a skeptic is done。 He clearly shows that if something is a “peer reviewed” published article， it can still be wrong （and often is）。 A published article is far from the final step in research， it’s a major one for sure， but is part of an ongoing conversation tha Anyone working in a STEM field should read this book。 Even if you’re into “pop-science” news this worth reading。 There is so much nonsense and straight up fraud out there， but it’s not a sign of the end of science。 Ritchie shows how being a skeptic is done。 He clearly shows that if something is a “peer reviewed” published article， it can still be wrong （and often is）。 A published article is far from the final step in research， it’s a major one for sure， but is part of an ongoing conversation that continually assesses and critiques it。 He covers everything from the awful paper that falsely claimed autism is caused by vaccines， to sensationalized news headlines， and how every food causes and cures cancer。 Highly recommend。 。。。more
Kevin C
，
Very enjoyable and informative read around the failing of the current sicentific system and process but alot the hope of the future。 The book was easy to ready and messages easy to process and understanding。 Not only has it been super insightful but I would say a valuable read around how much of what we base our current knowledge on in the world is on biaased and potentially incorrect information。 Would highly recommend to read
Neil Hunt
，
A provocative and shocking account questioning the direction of science today。The "Mertonian norms" of science: universalism， disinterestedness， communality， and organized scepticism， are being undermined by the structure of science， academia， and funding today。 Ritchie highlights four classes of problem:* Fraud， where data or results are just made up， either because the scientist thinks they should be true， or because the seek reputation and fame without the creative spark。* Bias， including p-h A provocative and shocking account questioning the direction of science today。The "Mertonian norms" of science: universalism， disinterestedness， communality， and organized scepticism， are being undermined by the structure of science， academia， and funding today。 Ritchie highlights four classes of problem:* Fraud， where data or results are just made up， either because the scientist thinks they should be true， or because the seek reputation and fame without the creative spark。* Bias， including p-hacking where data is farmed to achieve significance， or outcome switching where data is trawled looking for any effect of significance， and publication bias， where null or negative results are not published giving an unwarrantedly rosy picture of the results。* Negligence， where mistakes in collection or analysis lead to conclusions not supported by the experiment。* Hype， where marginal or low-magnitude effects are presented as meaningful， or where results are extrapolated way beyond the domain of validity （such as reporting health experiments on mice as relevant for human health guidance）。Ritchie outlines the structure and incentives which lead to this kind of outcome， and proposes some achievable changes we could make to restore the trust in science （or to restore science as justifying the trust given it by the public， such as:* Open science publishing and reducing the impact of prestige journals driving the quest for novel rather than solid results* Eliminating predatory journals and other routes to boost publication count without reliability* Encouragement for replication studies and publishing null results* A change in the academic incentive structure away from publication counts or h-index scores as a measure of scientific merit* A change in funding processes， funding scientists in place of studiesAll in all， a thought provoking read。。。 。。。more
Raghu Parthasarathy
，
About many of the problems currently plaguing science – a lack of replicability， sloppy statistics， overhyped results， perverse incentives， and more。 As a description of these important problems it’s good; there’s little new for those of us who have been following this topic for years， but it’s a clearly written summary for those new to the mess that is contemporary science。 It would have been good to also have more of a discussion of the many ways in which science works well， but that’s perhaps About many of the problems currently plaguing science – a lack of replicability， sloppy statistics， overhyped results， perverse incentives， and more。 As a description of these important problems it’s good; there’s little new for those of us who have been following this topic for years， but it’s a clearly written summary for those new to the mess that is contemporary science。 It would have been good to also have more of a discussion of the many ways in which science works well， but that’s perhaps asking for a much larger book。 Unfortunately， as a prescription for what to do to solve these problems Science Fictions is severely lacking。 The author basically states that we should have better procedures – an emphasis on transparency， less hype， etc。; if it were that easy， we’d already do it。 Perverse incentives， a resistance to criticism， and an overproduction of scientists underlie all the problem Ritchie writes about， as he nicely notes in the bulk of the book。 Unless these are addressed， the solutions （like rewarding Open Science initiatives） that Ritchie outlines will not have much of an impact， or will just add layers of bureaucracy on top of existing structures。 Still， I’ll give it4 stars; 80% of the book deserves it， and this book definitely needed to be written 。。。more
Inga Freiberga
，
It might be somehow strange to see the subjects of conversations with my friends， appearing as chapters in a book。 It just shows that Hype， Bias and Negligence （I haven't met Fraud in my carrier yet and I hope to never meet it） are in all fields of science - starting with psychology or economics and ending in cell biology。 The same applies to countries， one would say that scientific systems in USA， Sweden and China are quite different in many ways， but in all of them it is possible to encounter It might be somehow strange to see the subjects of conversations with my friends， appearing as chapters in a book。 It just shows that Hype， Bias and Negligence （I haven't met Fraud in my carrier yet and I hope to never meet it） are in all fields of science - starting with psychology or economics and ending in cell biology。 The same applies to countries， one would say that scientific systems in USA， Sweden and China are quite different in many ways， but in all of them it is possible to encounter the 4 evils mentioned above。 How to fight them？ How to avoid them？ And how to be a successful scientist without committing them， because in early stages it could happen just by accident （at least in some cases I would like to believe that）？ Those are quite important questions in days when the Hype about ones research is the way of getting money， publications and positions。 And again， in my opinion the constant search for the Hype in ones research is the one which leads to Negligence， Bias and Fraud。 I'm truly happy that this book has been written and it's scientist who wrote it。 Opening up about problems in your field is always hard， but it is much better than allowing someone else to show how wrong we can sometimes be。 In my opinion， admitting and acknowledging these problems should bring us closer to solving at least some of them。 They don't disappear by being ignored， they will disappear only when we will start to properly acknowledge them。 5 stars from me and I definitely recommend this book to students and researchers equally。 。。。more
Andrew
，
When a measure becomes the target， it ceases to be a good measure。~Goodhart’s Law （adapted by Marilyn Strathern）Wonderful tour through the （current） limitations of science， focusing specifically on how we get funded， how we get promoted， how we publish， how publications get hyped， and （the real focus） how statistical analysis can be incomplete or misleading。 Written at a perfect level for someone like me， who has a small amount of statistical understanding and works in medicine adjacent to， but When a measure becomes the target， it ceases to be a good measure。~Goodhart’s Law （adapted by Marilyn Strathern）Wonderful tour through the （current） limitations of science， focusing specifically on how we get funded， how we get promoted， how we publish， how publications get hyped， and （the real focus） how statistical analysis can be incomplete or misleading。 Written at a perfect level for someone like me， who has a small amount of statistical understanding and works in medicine adjacent to， but not within， the basic sciences。 The areas of inquiry are:FraudNegligenceBiasHypePerverse IncentivesI was so impressed by the legions of scientists who are acting in good faith to correct the errors of wayward authors， whether performing replication studies or re-analysis or devising AI-based algorithms to detect shenanigans。Many of the examples come from social psychology research， but among the authors highest ranked on Retraction Watch are clinical physicians。Ritchie ends with:How to Read a Scientific Paperand How to Fix ScienceIn that last， preprints， funding “people” and not projects， smarter fraud-detection， abandoning p-values， and many other recommendations are on offer。 Because no data is better than bad data:“Scientists who knowingly run low-powered research， and the reviewers and editors who wave through tiny studies for publication， are introducing a subtle poison into the scientific literature， weakening the evidence that it needs to progress。” 。。。more
Ishaan Dolli
，
A strong review as it is such an important book。 But a little dry at times which could well be unavoidable。 Useful for any person if they want to understand the cascade of fraud that is the way science comes to it's conclusions。 Not recommended for those susceptible to conspiracy theories。 A strong review as it is such an important book。 But a little dry at times which could well be unavoidable。 Useful for any person if they want to understand the cascade of fraud that is the way science comes to it's conclusions。 Not recommended for those susceptible to conspiracy theories。 。。。more
Patricia Veinott
，
This is an excellent book。 The argument is that the scientific method is basically the best idea humans have come up with， but that the way it's currently practiced is flawed。 Sometimes these flaws make it easy for unscrupulous individuals to commit outright fraud， knowingly falsifying data for personal gain。 But it's much more than that， it's the incentive structures， the way we use statistics， the way we conduct studies and the way we publish results that can all be problematic， wasting time， This is an excellent book。 The argument is that the scientific method is basically the best idea humans have come up with， but that the way it's currently practiced is flawed。 Sometimes these flaws make it easy for unscrupulous individuals to commit outright fraud， knowingly falsifying data for personal gain。 But it's much more than that， it's the incentive structures， the way we use statistics， the way we conduct studies and the way we publish results that can all be problematic， wasting time， money， and muddling the truth。 Ritchie takes a sobering look at the problems， but doesn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater。 He suggests solutions， along with tools that the reader can use to evaluate the quality of existing papers and studies。 It's well written， easy to read， and valuable to anyone who feels disenchanted or disoriented with the state of academia。 。。。more
Michal
，
Succinct and often funny diagnosis of the currently broken scientific system。 Bad incentives combine with human drive towards status and prestige and intersect with organizational desire for profit。 A recipe for the disaster that has been unfolding for at least last 20 years。 Not much here is new to those familiar with modern scientific system but still worth a read for a condensed and comprehensive overview of the issues。 Prior to reading this book my I had a sceptical stance towards most publi Succinct and often funny diagnosis of the currently broken scientific system。 Bad incentives combine with human drive towards status and prestige and intersect with organizational desire for profit。 A recipe for the disaster that has been unfolding for at least last 20 years。 Not much here is new to those familiar with modern scientific system but still worth a read for a condensed and comprehensive overview of the issues。 Prior to reading this book my I had a sceptical stance towards most published research with a view of "anything published might be true"， right now I think my stance is closer to "anything published is possibly false unless replicated"Worth a read。 。。。more
Katie Welch
，
meh。
Donald Schopflocher
，
This should be required reading for health and social science methods courses！ Ritchie presents a comprehensive discussion of the reproducibility crisis currently gripping the social and health sciences。 It is particularly strong when it indicts ‘p hacking’， a very prevalent abuse of statistical analysis， and when it discusses the perverse incentives that underly the practices of the research university and the scientific publishing enterprises。 Of course， there is little here that hasn’t been k This should be required reading for health and social science methods courses！ Ritchie presents a comprehensive discussion of the reproducibility crisis currently gripping the social and health sciences。 It is particularly strong when it indicts ‘p hacking’， a very prevalent abuse of statistical analysis， and when it discusses the perverse incentives that underly the practices of the research university and the scientific publishing enterprises。 Of course， there is little here that hasn’t been known by social scientists for a while， but maybe bringing it to the next generation of students will hasten the pace of change。 。。。more
Yavor Dragostinov
，
An essential book for any self-respecting person。Leave it to Stuart Ritchie to turn a grim topic such as problematic practices and issues in science to an interesting， witty， engaging and even hilarious at times book！
Daniel Hageman
，
Highly recommend。
James F
，
Books like this are why I rarely give 5 stars， I use them to emphasize the best books when I find them。This book will be of interest not only to scientists and statisticians， but also anybody who depends on their work; which is， of course， all of us。Get ahold of a copy and start reading it ASAP。
Don
，
bias bias bias of not science
Alex
，
the audience of this book is clearly lay people with no idea what's going on in science and you know what， fine， this is probably decent for that audience， in the same way that middle school teaches you a lot things that aren't really correct but whatever， you have to start somewhere。 this is a sloppy presentation of the mainline narrative that emerged from the replication crisis that is uncritical and myopic。 the presentation of statistics is particularly painful。 it is hard to take seriously a the audience of this book is clearly lay people with no idea what's going on in science and you know what， fine， this is probably decent for that audience， in the same way that middle school teaches you a lot things that aren't really correct but whatever， you have to start somewhere。 this is a sloppy presentation of the mainline narrative that emerged from the replication crisis that is uncritical and myopic。 the presentation of statistics is particularly painful。 it is hard to take seriously an account that presents psychology's problems as if they are universal or new; that sees science as producing results that either correct or incorrect， rather than subject to uncertainty; that centers p-hacking and replicability as the fundamental problems; that offers no analysis that hasn't already been rehashed umpteen times; that fails to cover the vast， exciting and recent meta-scientific literature （from within psychology itself！）; that。。。 the list goes on。 this book irritated the shit out of me 。。。more
Jenine Kinne
，
Interesting look at the threats to science including the threats that create the doubt that so many people express toward science， which has been especially problematic during a pandemic。
Jackson Enright
，
Excellent book
Nate
，
Ritchie lays out the challenges that science currently faces surrounding research， funding， publishing， and the public's views on the reliability and credibility of science。 The challenges lay in the incentives and systems that we have created to support， fund， hire， and promote scientists themselves as well as the mechanisms for supporting their research。 The biases of the scientists， the popularity of hyping "breakthrough" research， the funding of "breakthrough" scientists at a higher rate， an Ritchie lays out the challenges that science currently faces surrounding research， funding， publishing， and the public's views on the reliability and credibility of science。 The challenges lay in the incentives and systems that we have created to support， fund， hire， and promote scientists themselves as well as the mechanisms for supporting their research。 The biases of the scientists， the popularity of hyping "breakthrough" research， the funding of "breakthrough" scientists at a higher rate， and the need for scientific journals to be relevant all play into creating challenges within science that limits scientific progress， wastes private and public funding， and sends the wrong messages to academia， students， and the public about the significance and capability of science。 I found Ritchie's book enlightening， if not a little disappointing， for pointing out the blatant problems as they exist。 Still I have hope where there are individuals and groups of scientists pushing for reform and improvements。 I think this is an excellent read for those who want to understand the significance or insignificance of science headlines， scientific studies， and all of the things to look for when researching how relevant a particular study or topic is。 。。。more
Marc Alexander
，